Last summer, Democrats erupted in unholy (mind you, everything Democrats do is unholy) outrage over the Arizona law. It wss racist, Democrats screamed. It was evil. It was an abuse of the Constitution and everything America stands for. It was worse than anything the Nazis did.

It didn’t matter if Obama and his attorney general Eric Holder never bothered to read the ten page law (Democrats don’t feel the need to bother trifling with any law that is under two thousand pages, donthaknow). Ignorance is bliss with demonic demagogues like these two. They didn’t have to actually bother to read the law; they KNEW it was unconstitutional. And so they were entirely in the right to throw the full weight of the federal government against a state of the union. They were entirely right to literally go to the international bodies and decry the actions of a state of the union. They were entirely right to invite the president of Mexico to demonize a state of the union before the United States Congress while Democrats gave him a standing ovation.

Oops. It’s starting to look like somebody owes somebody a rather giant apology:

By Ashby Jones

﻿

Heading into Wednesday’s U.S. Supreme Court arguments concerning the legality of an Arizona anti-immigration law, much of the story surrounded the strange bedfellows created by the case.

As WSJ Supreme Court correspondent Jess Bravin wrote before the hearing, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had formed an “unusual alliance” with liberal groups hoping to strike down the law, which penalizes employers who hire illegal immigrants.

But heading out of the argument, the story has shifted to the case’s probable outcome: that the law would survive the constitutional challenge. According to Bravin, several justices on Wednesday rejected claims that the state exceeded the limited powers Congress left it to enforce immigration policies. Click here for Bravin’s story; here for commentary from Scotusblog’s Lyle Denniston.

For now, a little backstory, courtesy of Bravin’s story: The Legal Arizona Workers Act requires local prosecutors to investigate complaints that unauthorized aliens are working in their communities and, unless the allegations are “false and frivolous,” to file suit in state court to suspend the employer’s business licenses.

Those challenging the law say the Arizona measure violates the 1986 federal Immigration Reform and Control Act, whereby federal regulations supersede any “state or local law imposing civil or criminal sanctions (other than through licensing and similar laws).”

But that argument got little traction. “You read the definition of ‘license’ in the Administrative Procedure Act and this is awfully close,” said Justice Stephen Breyer. Chief Justice John Roberts said Congress provided states additional “wiggle room” by writing “not just ‘licensing laws,’ but ‘licensing and similar laws.”‘

Furthermore, Justice Antonin Scalia said that whatever Congress had in mind when adopting the 1986 law, current conditions along the border could justify the harsh sanctions Arizona adopted in 2007. Border states are in “serious trouble financially and for other reasons because of unrestrained immigration,” he said, and wouldn’t “have to resort to such massive measures” if federal immigration law “had been vigorously enforced.”

Another hurdle for the law’s challengers: Justice Elena Kagan is sitting out on the case: she was involved at earlier stages when serving in the Obama administration. A 4-4 split would leave Arizona’s employer sanctions intact — and would do so without creating a national precedent clarifying the limits of state authority to punish the hiring of illegal aliens.

Not that liberals give a flying frank about the Constitution, or due process, or admitting that they were massively wrong, or about anything else that would qualify them as decent human beings, but… what’s going to happen if – after all the godawful racist demagoguery and demonization at the hands of the Obama administration, the Democrat Party and the institutional allies of Democrats – we find that the U.S. Supreme Court rules that Arizona was right and Democrats were wrong???

The last time the Supreme Court ruled in a way Obama didn’t like, he didn’t have the emotional maturity or the dimmest understanding for basic American principles to respect the separation of powers. You know, the division of government into the executive, legislative and judicial branches? And so Obama – like a petulant little boy – proceeded to publicly rebuke the justices of the Supreme Court of the United States after the latter body politely accepted the invitation to hear Obama’s State of the Union address.

It’s just a guess on my part, but my bet is that – if in fact the Supreme Court actually does give Obama a smackdown over his idiotic attack of the state of Arizona – Obama and the Democrat Party will again utterly refuse to demonstrate anything other but the complete lack of class that they have always demonstrated.

4 Responses to “Oh Oh! What If Obama Democrats Crapped On Constitution By Blocking Arizona Law?”

Obama is a great idol among Swedish journalists and politicians, since most of them are socialists or liberals (and the difference is barely perceivable). When our socialists and liberals see your president as some sort of an icon – you must be in big trouble.

The immigration issue is one of many problems that socialists and liberals cannot handle proper, also over here in Europe. There is a never ending stream of people from Africa and the Middle East into Europe. Some of them are sent back but many are allowed to stay, receiving a refugee status. All of them strive for UK, Germany, Holland or Scandinavia because of the generous social security systems which cost us taxpayers quite a lot.

Doing something about it seems impossible because of all human rights organizations, press and media (which, as I said, are socialists or liberals with few exceptions). I think that the US and Canada are very much in the same situation. Let us hope that I am wrong, but I have a very bad feeling about the future of our world because of that.

There comes a point in which a society is “captured” by an ideology and cannot sustain any meaningful political U-Turns. Nazi Germany and any Marxist government you want to mention pretty much comes to mind (with the singular and beautiful exception of Poland). Afghanistan threw off Soviet shackles, only to replace them with ones that were arguably even worse.

We might be there now, even here in the USA.

Yes, we had a huge election, in which we threw out Democrats by the hundreds. But the media is still owned by socialist propagandists, as are the massively unionized leftist government workers. And the similarly overwhelmingly leftist judiciary.

How can the truth be long sustained, given the unrelenting attack from those who a) don’t even believe in truth given that they are postmodernists, and b) are willing to throw the truth away anyway because they believe the ends justify the means?

Yes, I am in Europe, and I am afraid that you people may become like us.

Behind everything more or less evil here, there is an intellectual, atheistic, morally depraved, leftist elite with socialistic or radical liberal ideas. The political journalists are recruited from these elite or strongly influenced by them.

I guess you have the same development in the USA. The election of Obama for president is proof of that. The difference is that you have a stronger tradition in independent thinking while we still trust our intellectuals too much. I am trying to expose that in my blog as often as I can.

The immigration issue, however, has revealed a big difference between the opinion of the “almighty” intellectual elite and the opinion of the common people. It is definitely so here in Sweden. It may finally open people’s eyes and make them understand that they are manipulated by these elite. It is time to wake up.

It was Thomas Jefferson who said, “With all the defects in our Constitution, whether general or particular, the comparison of our government with those of Europe, is like a comparison of Heaven with Hell.”

And, of course, he turned out to be so right it was scary. There was the nightmore known as “the French Revolution.” There was the scourge of constant militarism during the era of Napolean. There was Karl Marx, and then communism. There was the quagmire of European politics that resulted in World War 1. There was Benito Mussolini and fascism. There was Adolf Hitler and Nazism. There was the quagmire of European politics that resulted in World War 2. There was the “modern” and “scientific” thinking of secular humanism and of Darwinism that led to the greatest slaughter of humanity and the greatest crushing of the human spirit in all of human history.
And, yet, as Jefferson noted, and which is even MORE true today, there has always been this yearning by the American left to “be like Europe.”

And our own “intellectuals” who constantly curse and afflict us with their ideas invariably point to models that have largely already failed in Europe as “the way we need to be.”

George Orwell said that some ideas are so foolish that only an intellectual could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool. And Thomas Sowell has pointed out that the record of 20th century intellectuals – precisely the period when liberals began to decide that only they properly qualified as “intellectuals” – was especially appalling in this regard. The list of American intellectuals from the political left who embraced both communism under Stalin and Nazism under Hitler is just remarkable.

It’s interesting that many of the primary reasons for American “independent thinking” actually arose in Europe (e.g., from the Protestant Reformation). But it seems so common in history for nations and cultures to become great with great ideas, and then piss those ideas away as they are replaced with the babbling gibberish of “intellectuals” who think they know better.

The American founding fathers modelled themselves and their nation after the Judeo-Christian worldview, further informed and reinforced by the great thinkers of Western Civilization and their own historic understanding of what actually WORKED.

But we don’t need such ancient wisdom that is ancient because it keeps working whenever it is tried anymore. We’ve got Obama now.